6 ms·

Interesting I didnt know that at all. Your "proper iron was more valuable" comment reminds me of about a little different period from a documentary that I wat

by xufi 10y ago

Interesting I didnt know that at all. Your "proper iron was more valuable" comment reminds me of about a little different period from a documentary that I watched that talked about the time around 700BC where Umayyad empires used silver coins while gold and copper coins were used in Egypt/Syria.

unimpressive 10y ago
Not to mention that aluminum used to be more valuable than silver. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_monument#Aluminum_apex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_monument#Aluminum_a...
- yongjik 10y ago
  > Napoleon III of France is reputed to have held a banquet where the most honored guests were given aluminium utensils, while the others made do with gold. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History
- xufi 10y ago
  Correct, I believe this was also what I read about how it being more valuable allowed these ancient civilizations who had access to it, to have some more monetary value to their coins and also showed their political influence (Ex: a picture of their leader ) when they traded with other civilizations overseas
  - will_brown 10y ago
    >I read about how it being more valuable allowed these ancient civilizations who had access to it, to have some more monetary value to their coins and also showed their political influence (Ex: a picture of their leader ) Probably 1 of 3 reasons Gold was valuable at all to the ancients: 1. Gold is the most malleable of all the metals, making it easy to coin in extreme detail. 2. Antimicrobial properties (probably known to the ancients). 3. Oh look, its shiny!!! We are no less vain now, than then. Or perhaps no less vain then, than now. Edit: Sorry I think you were referencing aluminum.
    - yk 10y ago
      Gold was also the heaviest known element until the middle of the 19th century, which means that all impurities swim at the top and so it is easy to purify simply by melting it. Plus you can assay it by a touchstone. So there are a lot properties that make Gold the best metal for coins.
      - yoodenvranx 10y ago
        This is actually a crucial point in the later parts of Neal Stephensons Quicksilver/Baroque cycle.
      - ridgeguy 10y ago
        This only applies to impurities that don't dissolve in, or alloy with gold. For example, silver and copper cannot be removed from gold simply by melting because they form solution alloys that don't segregate in the molten state. Some solution alloys of gold include crown gold (silver, copper, gold) and white gold (palladium, nickel, gold).
      - sambe 10y ago
        Planet Money did an interesting episode on this, taking the opposite perspective: properties of other elements that made them less suitable. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/02/07/131363098/the-tuesday-podcast-why-gold http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/02/07/131363098/the-t...
    - oblio 10y ago
      You forgot: 0. Gold doesn't corrode/oxydize/otherwise react easily with most common elements, thus keeping it properties over extremely long periods of time. I doubt they knew or cared about 2). They did care about 1) being malleable and therefore easy to turn into pretty objects. They also cared that 3) it was shiny. But the main selling point was the fact that those pretty, shiny things lasted and could even be passed to the next generation ;)
      - will_brown 10y ago
        Yep. I originally included that and erased it for some reason. You are probably right about 2 as well, the reasons I like to think they might have been aware: 1.) there were Amphora made of both silver and gold; and 2.) they recognized the antimicrobial properties of other things (example: honey on wounds to avoid infection). Obviously the Amphora could simply be chalked up to displays of wealth, but I would think they observed the delay in food/beverage degradation in those Amphora compared to standard clay. I guess the funny thing with gold is even today we don't have broad industrial usage (probably good because of the limited supply), though I I suppose trace amounts are used in some modern electronics.
wavefunction 10y ago
700CE rather than BC.
- CelestialTeapot 10y ago
  Small point, consistent use of BCE/CE is preferable mixed usage or use of BC/AD. Thou shouldst not cross the streams... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era
  - wavefunction 10y ago
    BCE/CE is preferable to BC/AD in all cases.
    - me_and_you 10y ago
      No it is not. BC/AD has been in use for hundreds of years and is just fine. You can use BCE/CE if you want but it is no more valid than BC/AD.
- tmacro 10y ago
  On a tangentially related point, I attended a Christian private school where we were taught that it stood for Common Error, rather the Era, and that it's was somehow a diabolic plan to subvert Christianity. This among other reasons us probably why I am now an atheist.
mmanfrin 10y ago
CE. Umayyads were a muslim caliphate, which would have been pretty odd to exist 1300 years before Mohammed.

by xufi 10y ago

unimpressive 10y ago

Not to mention that aluminum used to be more valuable than silver. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_monument#Aluminum_apex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_monument#Aluminum_a...

yongjik 10y ago
> Napoleon III of France is reputed to have held a banquet where the most honored guests were given aluminium utensils, while the others made do with gold. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History
xufi 10y ago
Correct, I believe this was also what I read about how it being more valuable allowed these ancient civilizations who had access to it, to have some more monetary value to their coins and also showed their political influence (Ex: a picture of their leader ) when they traded with other civilizations overseas
- will_brown 10y ago
  >I read about how it being more valuable allowed these ancient civilizations who had access to it, to have some more monetary value to their coins and also showed their political influence (Ex: a picture of their leader ) Probably 1 of 3 reasons Gold was valuable at all to the ancients: 1. Gold is the most malleable of all the metals, making it easy to coin in extreme detail. 2. Antimicrobial properties (probably known to the ancients). 3. Oh look, its shiny!!! We are no less vain now, than then. Or perhaps no less vain then, than now. Edit: Sorry I think you were referencing aluminum.
  - yk 10y ago
    Gold was also the heaviest known element until the middle of the 19th century, which means that all impurities swim at the top and so it is easy to purify simply by melting it. Plus you can assay it by a touchstone. So there are a lot properties that make Gold the best metal for coins.
    - yoodenvranx 10y ago
      This is actually a crucial point in the later parts of Neal Stephensons Quicksilver/Baroque cycle.
    - ridgeguy 10y ago
      This only applies to impurities that don't dissolve in, or alloy with gold. For example, silver and copper cannot be removed from gold simply by melting because they form solution alloys that don't segregate in the molten state. Some solution alloys of gold include crown gold (silver, copper, gold) and white gold (palladium, nickel, gold).
    - sambe 10y ago
      Planet Money did an interesting episode on this, taking the opposite perspective: properties of other elements that made them less suitable. http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/02/07/131363098/the-tuesday-podcast-why-gold http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/02/07/131363098/the-t...
  - oblio 10y ago
    You forgot: 0. Gold doesn't corrode/oxydize/otherwise react easily with most common elements, thus keeping it properties over extremely long periods of time. I doubt they knew or cared about 2). They did care about 1) being malleable and therefore easy to turn into pretty objects. They also cared that 3) it was shiny. But the main selling point was the fact that those pretty, shiny things lasted and could even be passed to the next generation ;)
    - will_brown 10y ago
      Yep. I originally included that and erased it for some reason. You are probably right about 2 as well, the reasons I like to think they might have been aware: 1.) there were Amphora made of both silver and gold; and 2.) they recognized the antimicrobial properties of other things (example: honey on wounds to avoid infection). Obviously the Amphora could simply be chalked up to displays of wealth, but I would think they observed the delay in food/beverage degradation in those Amphora compared to standard clay. I guess the funny thing with gold is even today we don't have broad industrial usage (probably good because of the limited supply), though I I suppose trace amounts are used in some modern electronics.

wavefunction 10y ago

700CE rather than BC.

CelestialTeapot 10y ago
Small point, consistent use of BCE/CE is preferable mixed usage or use of BC/AD. Thou shouldst not cross the streams... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era
- wavefunction 10y ago
  BCE/CE is preferable to BC/AD in all cases.
  - me_and_you 10y ago
    No it is not. BC/AD has been in use for hundreds of years and is just fine. You can use BCE/CE if you want but it is no more valid than BC/AD.
tmacro 10y ago
On a tangentially related point, I attended a Christian private school where we were taught that it stood for Common Error, rather the Era, and that it's was somehow a diabolic plan to subvert Christianity. This among other reasons us probably why I am now an atheist.

mmanfrin 10y ago

CE. Umayyads were a muslim caliphate, which would have been pretty odd to exist 1300 years before Mohammed.